Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC-US)   Missing Malaysia Airlines flight may have turned back, and four passenger names have been given to intelligence agencies   (bbc.com) divider line 217
    More: Followup, Malaysia Airlines, Malaysia, intelligence  
•       •       •

12280 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Mar 2014 at 8:00 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



217 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-09 01:46:23 PM  

nekom: Spacman: BalugaJoe: Plane is listed as Delayed.

Yeah, it is. I get a tad choked up by that.

Despite the fact it is days late the aircraft will be considered to be delayed until the main wreckage and bodies are found and it becomes a hull loss/accident.

This is fairly common, Air France 447 was listed as delayed for almost 3 years.

It would be something if the plane just landed in Beijing about now and the passengers and crew acted as if it had been a normal flight.



With the risk of making a tasteless joke at the expense of a tragedy....this could be the best viral marketing ever....

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2647586/
 
2014-03-09 01:48:29 PM  

All Latest: I suspect that two fake IDs is about average on a flight in some parts of the world.


I suspect you didn't suspect this last week and now have 1 data point
 
2014-03-09 01:49:57 PM  

nekom: Spacman: BalugaJoe: Plane is listed as Delayed.

Yeah, it is. I get a tad choked up by that.

Despite the fact it is days late the aircraft will be considered to be delayed until the main wreckage and bodies are found and it becomes a hull loss/accident.

This is fairly common, Air France 447 was listed as delayed for almost 3 years.

It would be something if the plane just landed in Beijing about now and the passengers and crew acted as if it had been a normal flight.


img1.wikia.nocookie.net
wanted for questioning.
 
2014-03-09 01:55:49 PM  
Just thinking outloud, has anyone checked the tarmac at the airport?  It could still be waiting for a turn to take off.
 
2014-03-09 01:57:13 PM  

BillArr: The more I hear about this the more I think that there was someone on that plane that the governments wanted dead.


So the more you hear about this, the more you believe in the most outlandish, least likely explanation? They blew up an entire airliner when they could have just popped him outside the airport?
 
2014-03-09 01:58:13 PM  

CraicBaby: Hell, Air France 447 crashed in 13,000' of water and they found wreckage the next day.


The floating wreckage, of which there wasn't much, so the 13,000' doesn't matter for that. For the wreckage at the bottom, it took almost two  years before they found anything.
 
2014-03-09 02:09:47 PM  
I'm seeing a LOT of misconceptions about how the emergency beacons aboard commercial aircraft of this size work.

Couple of things:

- The fixed beacon on the airframe will only go off if the mechanical switch (ball & spring inside a cylinder) perceives a 2.3g delta velocity change in the forward axis only. Water landings of any kind, as a rule, generally do not set off these beacons. An impact in any direction other than about a 45 degree cone in the forward axis will not activate them. They are not waterproof, and will cease to function the moment it is submerged.

- There are other beacons aboard the aircraft, one or more in the cabin for crew manual activation, and several installed on the inflatable rafts & slides. These only activate if the switch on them is manually turned on, or the slide / raft is deployed (which yanks a strap off the beacon, causing it to activate). These are not waterproof either, nor are they buoyant unless they have a float collar on them (most do not). They are also not water activated, this functionality is only present on EPIRBs which are reserved for boats / ships at sea.

In a case similar to the Air France crash a few years ago, unless the pilots manually activate the airframe beacon by using the control panel (usually mounted above the co-pilots head), the beacon will not go off at all. If it is set off manually over water, you might (at best) get 2 or 3 pulses out, which is not enough for the satellite system to triangulate the position. Some models do integrate with GPS on the aircraft to provide location data, however most commercial airlines don't spring for the extra cost of this type beacon or the labor cost of running 2 ARINC wires from the cockpit all the way back to the beacon in the tail (thousands of dollars in labor man hours).

Source: I used to manage the tech support / technical sales integration department for the largest manufacturer of emergency beacons in the US.
 
2014-03-09 02:15:19 PM  

Maturin: CNN article says the two passengers with the stolen Italian and Austrian passports had tickets that were bought together. They were to go from Beijing to Amsterdam then split up, going to Copenhagen and Frankfort.


Copenhagen I can understand, but Frankfort? There are many more beautiful places in Kentucky to visit.

/Frankfurt-am-Main has a nice art museum, I don't know if there's much else to see
 
2014-03-09 02:28:07 PM  

Paris1127: Maturin: CNN article says the two passengers with the stolen Italian and Austrian passports had tickets that were bought together. They were to go from Beijing to Amsterdam then split up, going to Copenhagen and Frankfort.

Copenhagen I can understand, but Frankfort? There are many more beautiful places in Kentucky to visit.

/Frankfurt-am-Main has a nice art museum, I don't know if there's much else to see


They are most likely individuals using stolen European passports to enter the EU for the purposes of non-standard immigration.

Despite what people say, stolen EU nation passports are used daily to enter. Once you hit the deck you have legal protections. Much easier than hiding in a truck.

Once they enter, they
 
2014-03-09 02:28:53 PM  

Paris1127: Maturin: CNN article says the two passengers with the stolen Italian and Austrian passports had tickets that were bought together. They were to go from Beijing to Amsterdam then split up, going to Copenhagen and Frankfort.

Copenhagen I can understand, but Frankfort? There are many more beautiful places in Kentucky to visit.

/Frankfurt-am-Main has a nice art museum, I don't know if there's much else to see


Fressgass und Römer
 
2014-03-09 02:29:29 PM  

nekom: bikkurikun:
Not really, remember the earth is round and shortest route is close to poles, it's quite a normal route.

Oh I didn't mean that flight's route was unusual, I mean why would one go from Kuala Lumpur to Frankfurt or Copenhagen by way of a connection in Beijing?  Wouldn't Lufthansa, Air France or KLM have a more direct route?  Of course it could be they were just the cheapest tickets they could find.  It remains entirely possible that these were just miscellaneous criminals, drug mules or illegal immigrants or whathaveyou, who had shiatty luck.


Direct flights cost more. Poor immigrants fleeing a country tend to not be loaded with disposable income. You get there however you can.
 
2014-03-09 02:30:21 PM  

Big Merl: Just thinking outloud, has anyone checked the tarmac at the airport?  It could still be waiting for a turn to take off.


Is it at ORD?
 
2014-03-09 02:32:58 PM  
I'm going to go on-record with a guess that the pilots were flying manually, and the aircraft suffered explosive decompression. Pilots are out, plane goes into a nosedive and experiences powered flight straight down into the water's surface. Might explain why there isn't much of a debris field.
 
2014-03-09 02:45:51 PM  

BigNumber12: I'm going to go on-record with a guess that the pilots were flying manually, and the aircraft suffered explosive decompression. Pilots are out, plane goes into a nosedive and experiences powered flight straight down into the water's surface. Might explain why there isn't much of a debris field.

,

Where do you get flying manually from. That is impossible in a 777.

You cannot fly it manually. The flight computers always assess your control inputs. Always.
 
2014-03-09 02:46:27 PM  

Coach_J: Big Merl: Just thinking outloud, has anyone checked the tarmac at the airport?  It could still be waiting for a turn to take off.

Is it at ORD?


I laughed, and then I cried. I once almost missed a connecting flight because the plane I was on sat on the runway forever waiting for an empty gate.

ReverendJynxed: nekom: bikkurikun:
Not really, remember the earth is round and shortest route is close to poles, it's quite a normal route.

Oh I didn't mean that flight's route was unusual, I mean why would one go from Kuala Lumpur to Frankfurt or Copenhagen by way of a connection in Beijing?  Wouldn't Lufthansa, Air France or KLM have a more direct route?  Of course it could be they were just the cheapest tickets they could find.  It remains entirely possible that these were just miscellaneous criminals, drug mules or illegal immigrants or whathaveyou, who had shiatty luck.

Direct flights cost more. Poor immigrants fleeing a country tend to not be loaded with disposable income. You get there however you can.


Yeah, it was probably cheaper, plus their passports were less likely to be scrutinized. What's sad is that those people using the stolen passports may never be identified and their families might never know what happened to them.
 
2014-03-09 02:47:17 PM  

Coach_J: Big Merl: Just thinking outloud, has anyone checked the tarmac at the airport?  It could still be waiting for a turn to take off.

Is it at ORD?



The 4 new parallel runways aimed straight at my house seemed to have solved that little bottleneck.

// Soon to be six
/// I don't mind, planes are pretty.
 
2014-03-09 02:54:12 PM  

italie: Coach_J: Big Merl: Just thinking outloud, has anyone checked the tarmac at the airport?  It could still be waiting for a turn to take off.

Is it at ORD?


The 4 new parallel runways aimed straight at my house seemed to have solved that little bottleneck.

// Soon to be six
/// I don't mind, planes are pretty.


ORD still has issues with capacity though right?
 
2014-03-09 02:55:16 PM  

BigNumber12: I'm going to go on-record with a guess that the pilots were flying manually, and the aircraft suffered explosive decompression


I'm pretty skeptical. It's not like you go unconscious immediately, according to Wikipedia, you'd be likely to have something like 20 seconds of useful conciousness at a typical cruising altitude. (Maybe a bit less.) That's not much time in some sense, but in that time all they'd have to do is grab the O2 masks from behind their seats. This is something that they've been trained about. Furthermore, while I don't have any specific reason to know this, I suspect the pressure would take at least a few seconds to drop to ambient in any event that wouldn't result in a loss of the aircraft anyway, so that gives a bit more time.

Then of course there's the unlikeliness of "flying manually" in the first place.
 
2014-03-09 03:01:24 PM  
So any video footage of a flash in the sky or fireball shooting to the ground? Port security cameras, skyward telescopes? Anything pointing in that direction that caught something on video??
 
2014-03-09 03:03:13 PM  

Mrtraveler01: italie: Coach_J: Big Merl: Just thinking outloud, has anyone checked the tarmac at the airport?  It could still be waiting for a turn to take off.

Is it at ORD?


The 4 new parallel runways aimed straight at my house seemed to have solved that little bottleneck.

// Soon to be six
/// I don't mind, planes are pretty.

ORD still has issues with capacity though right?


It did,  but in the last year or two it has seemed pretty smooth the dozen times I've been through there. I don't have many inside sources anymore though, so the judgement is completely based on my experiences.

//Immigration is still a horrible mess, worst in any airport I've ever been through.
 
2014-03-09 03:06:23 PM  
Someone may have mentioned this above but if it is terrorism, why isn't any terror group taking responsibility.
 
2014-03-09 03:07:34 PM  

acchief: So any video footage of a flash in the sky or fireball shooting to the ground? Port security cameras, skyward telescopes? Anything pointing in that direction that caught something on video??


I heard earlier that the US did not detect any flashes but I can't find the link to where this was mentioned.
 
2014-03-09 03:09:45 PM  

OtherBrotherDarryl: acchief: So any video footage of a flash in the sky or fireball shooting to the ground? Port security cameras, skyward telescopes? Anything pointing in that direction that caught something on video??

I heard earlier that the US did not detect any flashes but I can't find the link to where this was mentioned.



Right here:  http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/missing-jet/pentagon-data-suggests-j e t-didnt-explode-new-york-times-n48186

We do watch the skies for explosions, apparently, and we didn't see any.
 
2014-03-09 03:11:14 PM  

evaned: Then of course there's the unlikeliness of "flying manually" in the first place.


I'm trying to account for the fact that the aircraft obviously didn't continue on its set course, as happened with Payne Stewart. And it doesn't seem to have detonated in midair, which should have created a fairly obvious debris field.

We're running out of reasonable explanations.
 
2014-03-09 03:13:38 PM  
www.leparisien.fr

Possible plane door reported by LeParisien as being sighted from Vietnamese search aircraft: http://www.leparisien.fr/international/boeing-disparu-ouverture-d-une - enquete-pour-terrorisme-09-03-2014-3656411.php
 
2014-03-09 03:14:43 PM  

italie: I don't mind, planes are pretty.


And white with red stripes, curtains in the windows and wheels and they look like a big Tylenol!
 
2014-03-09 03:15:55 PM  

SashiRomanenko: I'm seeing a LOT of misconceptions about how the emergency beacons aboard commercial aircraft of this size work.

Couple of things:

- The fixed beacon on the airframe will only go off if the mechanical switch (ball & spring inside a cylinder) perceives a 2.3g delta velocity change in the forward axis only. Water landings of any kind, as a rule, generally do not set off these beacons. An impact in any direction other than about a 45 degree cone in the forward axis will not activate them. They are not waterproof, and will cease to function the moment it is submerged.

- There are other beacons aboard the aircraft, one or more in the cabin for crew manual activation, and several installed on the inflatable rafts & slides. These only activate if the switch on them is manually turned on, or the slide / raft is deployed (which yanks a strap off the beacon, causing it to activate). These are not waterproof either, nor are they buoyant unless they have a float collar on them (most do not). They are also not water activated, this functionality is only present on EPIRBs which are reserved for boats / ships at sea.

In a case similar to the Air France crash a few years ago, unless the pilots manually activate the airframe beacon by using the control panel (usually mounted above the co-pilots head), the beacon will not go off at all. If it is set off manually over water, you might (at best) get 2 or 3 pulses out, which is not enough for the satellite system to triangulate the position. Some models do integrate with GPS on the aircraft to provide location data, however most commercial airlines don't spring for the extra cost of this type beacon or the labor cost of running 2 ARINC wires from the cockpit all the way back to the beacon in the tail (thousands of dollars in labor man hours).

Source: I used to manage the tech support / technical sales integration department for the largest manufacturer of emergency beacons in the US.


What if just one passenger was wearing

cdn3.breitling.com



a Breitling Emergency?
 
2014-03-09 03:16:04 PM  

Peter von Nostrand: BravadoGT: If it turns out to be a terrorist attack (and I think it will)--that would be a lot of dead Chinese at the hands of the Religion of Peace™ recently.

You want it to be a terrorist attack to fit your political agenda. Stay classy


Look up "Uighers".  Then get back to me, mmmkay?
 
2014-03-09 03:19:18 PM  

Khazar-Khum: Peter von Nostrand: BravadoGT: If it turns out to be a terrorist attack (and I think it will)--that would be a lot of dead Chinese at the hands of the Religion of Peace™ recently.

You want it to be a terrorist attack to fit your political agenda. Stay classy

Look up "Uighers".  Then get back to me, mmmkay?


At first I thought it was plausible. But if they were terrorists, why would they buy not 1 but 2 additional plane tickets in addition to this one to Beijing?

That plus the reports of the plane possibly trying to turn back to KL make me think it was less likely that it was a terrorist attack.
 
2014-03-09 03:20:27 PM  

acchief: So any video footage of a flash in the sky or fireball shooting to the ground? Port security cameras, skyward telescopes? Anything pointing in that direction that caught something on video??


Someone had video of it on his smart phone, but it was vertical and his friends mocked him, so he deleted it.
 
2014-03-09 03:25:19 PM  
What I got outta this thread:

Some guys with their right hands chewed off.

2-millimeter womp rats.

And no f**king telemetry.
 
2014-03-09 03:26:14 PM  
The only bit of remotely interesting info in that "article" is that I finally noticed that BBC's video player volume control goes up to 11. I snickered.
 
2014-03-09 03:30:07 PM  

nekom: OtherBrotherDarryl: acchief: So any video footage of a flash in the sky or fireball shooting to the ground? Port security cameras, skyward telescopes? Anything pointing in that direction that caught something on video??

I heard earlier that the US did not detect any flashes but I can't find the link to where this was mentioned.


Right here:  http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/missing-jet/pentagon-data-suggests-j e t-didnt-explode-new-york-times-n48186

We do watch the skies for explosions, apparently, and we didn't see any.


Jesus, what your satellites look for is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=equ8CACRVWc

This ain't a missile launching, I don't know what the fark you think you guys are busy looking at in the vicinity of the crash.

No, really. Explain to me what your satellites are looking for there and how it is anything to do with this.
 
2014-03-09 03:35:57 PM  

SashiRomanenko: I'm seeing a LOT of misconceptions about how the emergency beacons aboard commercial aircraft of this size work.

Couple of things:

- The fixed beacon on the airframe will only go off if the mechanical switch (ball & spring inside a cylinder) perceives a 2.3g delta velocity change in the forward axis only. Water landings of any kind, as a rule, generally do not set off these beacons. An impact in any direction other than about a 45 degree cone in the forward axis will not activate them. They are not waterproof, and will cease to function the moment it is submerged.

- There are other beacons aboard the aircraft, one or more in the cabin for crew manual activation, and several installed on the inflatable rafts & slides. These only activate if the switch on them is manually turned on, or the slide / raft is deployed (which yanks a strap off the beacon, causing it to activate). These are not waterproof either, nor are they buoyant unless they have a float collar on them (most do not). They are also not water activated, this functionality is only present on EPIRBs which are reserved for boats / ships at sea.

In a case similar to the Air France crash a few years ago, unless the pilots manually activate the airframe beacon by using the control panel (usually mounted above the co-pilots head), the beacon will not go off at all. If it is set off manually over water, you might (at best) get 2 or 3 pulses out, which is not enough for the satellite system to triangulate the position. Some models do integrate with GPS on the aircraft to provide location data, however most commercial airlines don't spring for the extra cost of this type beacon or the labor cost of running 2 ARINC wires from the cockpit all the way back to the beacon in the tail (thousands of dollars in labor man hours).

Source: I used to manage the tech support / technical sales integration department for the largest manufacturer of emergency beacons in the US.


Seems like they should, uh, you know, make them water proof
 
2014-03-09 03:37:15 PM  

Khazar-Khum: Look up "Uighers".  Then get back to me, mmmkay?


What do Slim Shady or Joss Stone have to do with aeroplanes?

 
2014-03-09 03:40:29 PM  

Contrabulous Flabtraption: Seems like they should, uh, you know, make them water proof


Not only are they waterproof, they are designed to kick off upon contact with water. I have no Idea what random bullshiat that guy is chirping on about
 
2014-03-09 03:51:38 PM  

ransack.: What if just one passenger was wearing a Breitling Emergency?


He would have to survive long enough to activate it. Those only transmit after you unscrew a cap and pull the antenna out.
 
2014-03-09 04:21:21 PM  

Contrabulous Flabtraption: SashiRomanenko: I'm seeing a LOT of misconceptions about how the emergency beacons aboard commercial aircraft of this size work.

Couple of things:

- The fixed beacon on the airframe will only go off if the mechanical switch (ball & spring inside a cylinder) perceives a 2.3g delta velocity change in the forward axis only. Water landings of any kind, as a rule, generally do not set off these beacons. An impact in any direction other than about a 45 degree cone in the forward axis will not activate them. They are not waterproof, and will cease to function the moment it is submerged.

- There are other beacons aboard the aircraft, one or more in the cabin for crew manual activation, and several installed on the inflatable rafts & slides. These only activate if the switch on them is manually turned on, or the slide / raft is deployed (which yanks a strap off the beacon, causing it to activate). These are not waterproof either, nor are they buoyant unless they have a float collar on them (most do not). They are also not water activated, this functionality is only present on EPIRBs which are reserved for boats / ships at sea.

In a case similar to the Air France crash a few years ago, unless the pilots manually activate the airframe beacon by using the control panel (usually mounted above the co-pilots head), the beacon will not go off at all. If it is set off manually over water, you might (at best) get 2 or 3 pulses out, which is not enough for the satellite system to triangulate the position. Some models do integrate with GPS on the aircraft to provide location data, however most commercial airlines don't spring for the extra cost of this type beacon or the labor cost of running 2 ARINC wires from the cockpit all the way back to the beacon in the tail (thousands of dollars in labor man hours).

Source: I used to manage the tech support / technical sales integration department for the largest manufacturer of emergency beacons in the US.

Seems like they should, uh, you know, make them water proof


It's not a requirement per RTCA DO-204. Additionally, waterproof means no external antenna mounted to the airframe. No external antenna means it won't be able to transmit outside of the giant sealed metal tube they reside in, and you won't be able to activate it via a cockpit remote switch. Basic physics still apply, and for every manufacturer that makes a 40,000$ beacon that does everything beyond the basic requirements, ten others will be there making 5,000$ ones that only meet the basic requirement. Companies are cheap, regulations are bought by corporate money.
 
2014-03-09 05:00:03 PM  
lenonhonor.com
Wanted for questioning...


....not to be confused with younger brother
3.bp.blogspot.com

lh5.googleusercontent.com

/scared shatless
 
2014-03-09 05:13:29 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-09 05:42:02 PM  
Gee.  Maybe if those "intelligence agencies" weren't so obsessed with the grocery list on my iPhone they'd have spotted these asshats in time.
 
2014-03-09 05:45:50 PM  

SashiRomanenko: Source: I used to manage the tech support / technical sales integration department for the largest manufacturer of emergency beacons in the US.


These things don't sound all that well thought out.  Why not simply give the beacon access to the plane's altitude data, and trigger it if the data either stops flowing or indicates an abnormal sink rate?  Why all this wacky stuff with manual activation, g-force sensors, and so forth?  Use one reliable, failsafe beacon instead of several gimmicky ones.
 
2014-03-09 05:47:34 PM  

BigNumber12: I'm trying to account for the fact that the aircraft obviously didn't continue on its set course, as happened with Payne Stewart. And it doesn't seem to have detonated in midair, which should have created a fairly obvious debris field.


They could have just suffered a loss of control. Either direct -- e.g. brought about by something like a control malfunction (a la the 737 rudder problem from a couple decades back) -- or indirect -- e.g. brought about by pilot error (a la Air France 447).  That to me seems much more likely than explosive decompression leading to pilot hypoxia while they weren't on autopilot.
 
2014-03-09 05:48:06 PM  
CraicBaby:
The spot where the oil slicks were found was only 150' deep. If it had crashed there, they would have found wreckage by now. Hell, Air France 447 crashed in 13,000' of water and they found wreckage the next day.

The ocean is big. Very big. If you read some of the articles about this crash you'd see that it has taken days for ships to get out there and search the area. Plus, oil slicks move with the currents. The fact they have found, presumably, a door near the slicks is backing up my assertion here. Regardless of depth, it can take a while to find a crash site.
 
2014-03-09 05:56:49 PM  

Man On Pink Corner: SashiRomanenko: Source: I used to manage the tech support / technical sales integration department for the largest manufacturer of emergency beacons in the US.

These things don't sound all that well thought out.  Why not simply give the beacon access to the plane's altitude data, and trigger it if the data either stops flowing or indicates an abnormal sink rate?  Why all this wacky stuff with manual activation, g-force sensors, and so forth?  Use one reliable, failsafe beacon instead of several gimmicky ones.


I wholeheartedly agree with you, most of it is due to the excruciating pace that the FAR takes to update regulations and requirements. That, and there is no one source of that data except from a main flight computer - something which is found only on newer aircraft and there are several manufacturers that would have to come to agreement on a standardized spec to do so. The retrofit costs to implement such a system are great enough that the Airlines would fight it tooth and nail, and sadly their lobbies money combined with politics would make this effort take years, if not decades to implement.
 
2014-03-09 06:01:51 PM  
The BBC has been pursuing a campaign of "Don't blame Muslims at any cost" which might explain the idiotic headline about the plane turning back to somewhere.
 
2014-03-09 06:42:53 PM  

emberposse: The BBC has been pursuing a campaign of "Don't blame Muslims at any cost" which might explain the idiotic headline about the plane turning back to somewhere.


Just when I thought I heard something stupid.

The BBC didn't make that headline up, the radar data from Malaysia's Air Force showed that. Unless you think the Malaysia Air Force is behind this whole conspiracy.
 
2014-03-09 07:06:27 PM  
I was on Malaysian Air Flight MH370; the plane went down in twelve minutes.  Two hundred and thiry nine of us went into the water.  Didn't see the first shark for about half an hour...
 
2014-03-09 07:10:21 PM  

emberposse: The BBC has been pursuing a campaign of "Don't blame Muslims at any cost" which might explain the idiotic headline about the plane turning back to somewhere.



You do realize that the story about the flight possibly turning back originated from the Malaysian transport minister, and not the BBC, right? They're just reporting on what he said. And you know that you "can't blame Muslims" when you don't even know why the plane crashed, right? That "campaign," as you call it, is what everyone else knows as responsible journalism.
 
2014-03-09 07:16:41 PM  
There have been a number of theories put forward. The BBC goes with the one that fits their world view.
 
Displayed 50 of 217 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report